Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Mrs. Don-o; NYer; Salvation; Pyro7480; Coleus; narses; annalex; Campion; don-o; OpusatFR; ...
I think that the "just war" theories of St. Thomas Aquinas definitely apply.

Everything I've read indicates that Japanese resistance to an Allied invasion would have been far greater than anticipated and that the loss of life would have been far worse than anyone believed (both civilian and military).

The Potsdam Declaration of July 26, 1945 promised "prompt and utter destruction" if the Japanese did not surrender immediately. The REPEATED Japanese response was mokusatsu which means that they intended to "kill" Allied demands with "silent contempt." Less than a week later we bombed Hiroshima with the most destructive weapon that has ever been used in wartime. Over the course of the next two days we heard nothing, so the presumption was that the policy of mokusatsu was still in effect and that's when we decided to drop the second bomb on Nagasaki. It's worth noting that even with these bombings American leaders deliberately AVOIDED bombing the more populated and significant cities of Tokyo and Kyoto.

Throughout World War II American commanders had gone out of their way to avoid civilian casualties. Unfortunately, it was impossible to do this with the Atomic Bomb. Certainly it was a tragedy of horrific proportions, but that does not mean it was avoidable.

115 posted on 08/11/2010 11:16:35 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies ]


To: wagglebee

There’s an amazing Japanese film, not great production values, about the 24 hours before the Japanese surrender. There were still people who wanted to fight till they could fight no more.

I THINK there was an agreement not to harm Kyoto because of it’s fantastic artistic and historical value.


117 posted on 08/11/2010 11:28:34 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee

Well said. I don’t think many of those who are alive today but who did not live through WW2 have an inkling of the cruelty and determination of the Japanese, both military and civilian. Anyone who has studied the subject will likely agree that there would have been monumental loss of American lives, not only if the war continued, but afterward. Americans would have become virtual slaves, and that is if they survived. It is all too easy to sit back from a place of safety and judge the actions and decisions of our predecessors. Imho, allowing the Japanese to win WW2 would be the equivalent of national suicide.


119 posted on 08/11/2010 11:32:51 AM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee
It's worth noting that even with these bombings American leaders deliberately AVOIDED bombing the more populated and significant cities of Tokyo and Kyoto.

Throughout World War II American commanders had gone out of their way to avoid civilian casualties.

On the night of 9th March, 1945, the U.S Air Force firebombed Tokyo. the resulting firestorm killed more than 100,000 people, more than died immediately in Hiroshima.

Our commanders, and specifically Gen. Curtis LeMay, were not trying to avoid civilian casualties.

Cities that had already been severely damaged by conventional bombing were eliminated from the list of those considered for atomic bombing, as this would not have provided an accurate demonstration of the power of the bomb. An exception was Nagasaki, but this was not the original target of that bombing mission. I believe that it is true that we avoided bombing Kyoto for cultural reasons and that President Truman may have been involved in this decision.

122 posted on 08/11/2010 11:51:53 AM PDT by wideminded
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee

This is not a war crime.

It is certainly regrettable, and we can wish it never would have been necessary. We can mourn for those killed, and we can pray that such a thing never happen again.

But, we can also do that regarding any collateral damage in any war or any police action.

When faced with cold, hard necessity, it is not a crime to respond with cold, hard force.


157 posted on 08/11/2010 2:20:41 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and proud of it. Those who truly support our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson